Dragon Age Cooldown Versus Vancian

[Infinitron]

The only problem is that a few court of jesters in this topic are misrepresenting the "this and that" of the games in question, both for Origins and the IE. The funny thing is that you seem to revel in the ignorance, and are inexplicably smug and proud of yourselves in spite of what nature did to you. Then, Infinitron, the court jester with the most bells on, tries to silence me with a cheapshot, merely for bringing you guys to task on the absurdities spouting from your gaping maws of ignorance. I've seen him try that on a few posters over the years, and he's always defending his fellow ignoramuses.

I've seen him...over the years

Geez lady. Get a life.

 

[RK47]

Lurkmore.

 

[Lilura]

Geez lady. Get a life.

Says the guy with over 30,000 posts in three years. Then again, just because you don't follow your own advice, doesn't mean it isn't good advice. I'll try to ignore your witless cheapshots in the future. I just didn't expect them from a staff member, so it surprised me a bit.

 

[Sensuki]

What I was trying to say is that I have no idea what limitation you're talking about. I could control multiple characters in DA:O/2 just fine.

Well for me, not being able to control multiple units at once combined with the shitty locked POV camera gives a fairly awful feeling to the game. To be honest I did not really have a problem with KotOR1/2 in this fashion though. I think this was handled much better in KotOR even if the combat amounts to click on enemy and queue up the same shit. I prefer KotOR combat to DA:O tbh, even though there's "less to do" and it's a yawn.

 

[Infinitron]

Geez lady. Get a life.

Says the guy with over 30,000 posts in three years. Then again, just because you don't follow your own advice, doesn't mean it isn't good advice. I'll try to ignore your witless cheapshots in the future.

OK, crash course in human social etiquette:

Do you realize that it's very strange when lurkers/alts that nobody knows come out of nowhere to accuse the Codex of being a shitty forum that's "going down the toilet", or to say that it's being ruined by this or that moderator? I mean, you're a lurker. I hate to say it, but you don't really have a say here. You're not part of the community. The polite thing to do would be to keep your opinions to yourself, or just, you know, leave if this place is so horrible to you.

 

[Lilura]

Well for me, not being able to control multiple units at once combined with the shitty locked POV camera gives a fairly awful feeling to the game.

The problem is the awful feeling you got is your own stupid fault, because you can control multiple units in Origins (just like IE), and the camera isn't locked.

 

[Lilura]

OK, crash course in human social etiquette:

Do you realize that it's very strange when lurkers/alts that nobody knows come out of nowhere to accuse the Codex of being a shitty forum that's "going down the toilet", or to say that it's being ruined by this or that moderator? I mean, you're a lurker. I hate to say it, but you don't really have a say here. You're not part of the community. The polite thing to do would be to keep your opinions to yourself, or just, you know, leave if this place is so horrible to you.

Where have I said this forum is going down the toilet or is being ruined by you or any other staff member? Do you think I would have posted my archery topic or a post history would exist like mine if I thought so? Stop making stuff up. And since when is someone who has posting permissions not part of a community and should keep their opinions to themselves?

 

[RK47]

Die in an car crash. FUCK. OFF. AND. DIE.
GET ON A PLANE OVER UKRAINE ALREADY GOD FUCKING SHIT.
GET ARROWED ON THE HEAD.
I DONT GIVE A FUCK WHAT U SAID ANYMORE.

 

[DashiDMV]

Die in an car crash. FUCK. OFF. AND. DIE.
GET ON A PLANE OVER UKRAINE ALREADY GOD FUCKING SHIT.
GET ARROWED ON THE HEAD.
I DONT GIVE A FUCK WHAT U SAID ANYMORE.

Haha how did you know what I thought about you. Kill yourself you slope piece of shit.

 

[Volourn]

"I prefer KotOR combat to DA:O tbh, even though there's "less to do" and it's a yawn."

y u moran?

 

[Sensuki]

Well for me, not being able to control multiple units at once combined with the shitty locked POV camera gives a fairly awful feeling to the game.

The problem is the awful feeling you got is your own stupid fault, because you can control multiple units in Origins (just like IE), and the camera isn't locked.

So edgy.

I haven't played it since it came out (did all of the origin stories and finished the game on insane/nightmare with a warrior), but I remember the camera being locked to a single unit in combat even in the isometric mode, and you had to toggle between units to control them. I think in exploration mode you could move them as a group and you could free look.

DA:O is probably one of the games that I was most disappointed with ever, since I had been looking forward to it since 2003 and it turned out to be a popamole piece of shit. The only good thing about it was the C&C. DA:O Combat is literally the most banal shit ever.

 

[Lilura]

So wrong.

Even with a unit selected you could still pan the camera around to other unselected units or empty space, sort of like in the patched NWN2 strategic view. You could also marquee select, just like in IE. Disliking a game is fine, disliking it on imagined false memories isn't going to resonate well with people who live in reality.

 

[Delterius]

I'm barely paying attention to this banal magic discussion but from what I've skimmed it's a bunch of grognards complaining about the possibility of wizards being able to use magic too much before alt-tabbing into D:OS discussion and sucking more Larian cock.

It is almost as if people have different expectations for different kinds of games and are therefore capable of enjoying multiple experiences for what they are. Instead of just screaming cargo cult in every post they make.

What I find weird in this discussion is that ultimately what is most important is that PoE is being made with resource management in mind. Not only are there incentives or demands that the player do not rest but Wizards specifically are hybrids of Sorcerers and Mages, which means the former's tactical versatility coupled with the later's spell access. These changes I think are what will turn Mages into a more interesting class. Not the (admittedly welcome) change to their default weapons from Slings and Darts to Wands and Rods. Not auto AoE. Encounter design and pacing.

So wrong.

Even with a unit selected you could still pan the camera around to other unselected units or empty space, sort of like in the patched NWN2 strategic view. You could also marquee select, just like in IE. Disliking a game is fine, disliking it on imagined false memories isn't going to resonate well with people who live in reality.

This is very much true, unless you played the game on the console version. Sensuki?

DA:O was notable because when compared to things like NwN2 the game itself feels much more functional. It suffers from a lack of variety in its beastiary and of how much the game just showers you with obvious overpowered abilities and cheap resources. At least there aren't many useless abilities like in, say, BG or Divine Divinity but things like the Arcane Warrior spec, Mana Clash and Fireball are just too much and too cheaply used. There are some interesting encounters such as Jarvias'. They exist. If all the trash combat in the game was cut and just some more of the harder fights were added, DA:O itself would have been much better. Sea's mod shows you can do much even if DA:O is you base.

 

[Ivan]

The noobs are taking over.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Nobody here has plausible arguments against cooldowns as featured in Origins

While cooldowns were only one flaw among many in DA:O's interpretation of magic, they certainly didn't help in any way to promote interesting gameplay. Simply put, they weren't up to the task of being the primary constraint on spellcasting in such a way as to make fights interesting and promote varied tactics. A lack of persistent resource management, like Vancian casting imposes, meant that the player party would always be at full capability in every single encounter, able to fire off their most powerful abilities without a care.

The effect this had was to trivialize all non-boss encounters past a certain point in the game. Any fight that wasn't highly-scripted, or bloated with HP for tank&spank tactics couldn't stand up against the barrage of death a couple of Origins mages could unleash. In the extreme, a Storm of the Century could be used to open up every single encounter, often ending it with that single cast. Stepping down from the pinnacle of cheese, parties could still run roughshod on encounters that could have otherwise felt meaningful. Think of some of the fights in the Deep Roads against, say, a group of Darkspawn that included a mage and an Ogre in addition to the typical Hur/Genlocks. In a system in which ability uses over a stretch of encounters are finite, this could have been a perfect example of an encounter that sits between boss and trash; one that requires skill and thought to pass while conserving resources. But with cooldowns as the only constraint, it, like every non-boss fight, is thrown straight to the garbage bin faster than you can execute a sequence of Mana Clash -> Force Field -> AoE damage.

As I said, there were other mechanics, besides cooldowns, that made DA:O combat the mess that (was good for what) it is. But the game is far from an example of the mechanic as anything good.

 

[Sensuki]

So wrong.

Even with a unit selected you could still pan the camera around to other unselected units or empty space, sort of like in the patched NWN2 strategic view. You could also marquee select, just like in IE. Disliking a game is fine, disliking it on imagined false memories isn't going to resonate well with people who live in reality.

But you can still only control one unit at a time in combat, which was the issue I stated I had a problem with

 

[Nihiliste]

So wrong.

Even with a unit selected you could still pan the camera around to other unselected units or empty space, sort of like in the patched NWN2 strategic view. You could also marquee select, just like in IE. Disliking a game is fine, disliking it on imagined false memories isn't going to resonate well with people who live in reality.

But you can still only control one unit at a time in combat, which was the issue I stated I had a problem with

I don't remember the specifics of the game that well but I'm not really sure what you're getting at either here. In RT it was clunky to switch between people but I mostly played those games the same way I would the IE games; pause the game, assign an action to each party member, rinse and repeat. Obviously there were other problems with the combat - boring beastiary, lack of stat transparency, repetitive/simplistic encounter design but I feel like from a purely party control POV the main difference is aesthetic. It felt a bit different but ultimately I was able to play it with a fairly similar style.

I may not be remembering correctly, or missing something here, but I'm just not entirely sure what you mean.

 

[Sensuki]

It's quite simple really, you can only select a single character at a time in combat in isometric mode. It's a limitation that is a side effect of being a game developed for consoles. Thus, it is absolutely pointless playing in isometric mode, really.

 

[Nihiliste]

I'm pretty sure that game was developed for PC and ported to console? I'm not saying it doesn't have its flaws, but I remember primarily playing it in isometric and enjoying it.

 

[Volourn]

"It's a limitation that is a side effect of being a game developed for consoles."

No.

 

[Mangoose]

The only problem is that a few court of jesters in this topic are misrepresenting the "this and that" of the games in question, both for Origins and the IE.

There are no games in question, except for Pillars of Existence. The games that have been mentioned were examples used to illustrate general combat systems. The specific games don't matter. The combat system to be designed for PoE is what matters.

Back on topic, there is no "better" in non-turn based RPG combat - there's only bad, worse and worst.

If A is worse than B, then B is better than A. Jesus fuck.

 

[Mangoose]

What I was trying to say is that I have no idea what limitation you're talking about. I could control multiple characters in DA:O/2 just fine.

Well for me, not being able to control multiple units at once combined with the shitty locked POV camera gives a fairly awful feeling to the game. To be honest I did not really have a problem with KotOR1/2 in this fashion though. I think this was handled much better in KotOR even if the combat amounts to click on enemy and queue up the same shit. I prefer KotOR combat to DA:O tbh, even though there's "less to do" and it's a yawn.

I think you're confusing DA:O with DA2.

Edit: Actually since you said you played it right when it came out, there may have been a point where better party control and POV was patched into DAO. Lemme check.

 

[Sensuki]

I've never played DA2. Didn't buy it.

I'm pretty sure that game was developed for PC and ported to console?

No

 

[Mangoose]

Nobody here has plausible arguments against cooldowns as featured in Origins

While cooldowns were only one flaw among many in DA:O's interpretation of magic, they certainly didn't help in any way to promote interesting gameplay. Simply put, they weren't up to the task of being the primary constraint on spellcasting in such a way as to make fights interesting and promote varied tactics. A lack of persistent resource management, like Vancian casting imposes, meant that the player party would always be at full capability in every single encounter, able to fire off their most powerful abilities without a care.

But but but you can rest anywhere in IE games.

 

[Lilura]

The problem with Vancian magic is that the player only has to rest to refill their slots, thereby trivializing management of spells. Just spam the spells from their slots, faceroll every encounter, then rest. Rinse Repeat.

There isn't much wrong with Vancian magic providing that resting is strictly restricted. The IE games utterly failed at this, and only with the Tactics mod (later, SCS2) did we start to see a concerted implementation, albeit only in BG2's starter dungeon (where resting was only permitted once, to fill your spell slots). After which resting caused 100% respawns of resource-draining enemies. The more you rested, the less you had, until you had nothing and had to reload. Apart from that, the risk of being waylaid was mostly trivial: the number, the type, the frequency - all were a joke. This goes for every IE game, wherein respawns from resting are even welcome - more experience!

Temple of Elemental Evil used a respawning approach that was similar, but it was the high % chance of a respawn on resting that would dissuade you, and the fact that even a rat trashmob is going to take time to defeat under a superior turn-based system. You realized that you should probably find a safe-haven, or teleport (the arcane spell) out of the Temple to rest. Specific user-made modules for NWN1 handled resting with a welcome heavy hand, it was restricted to once every four hours which is 8 mins real-time. This stops rest abuse except for people who are happy to leave their PC while they do something else.

Moving on... the argument that after a certain point Origins mages become OP doesn't really put cooldowns in a negative light, because after a certain point - and much earlier than Origins - mages in the IE decimate everything with a vast array of direct dmg, buffing, disablers and phantasms. The argument that Storm of the Century is an awesome "I WIN" button can be applied to several IE spells I can name off the top of my head. In Baldur's Gate, the three-pronged Sleep + Blindness + Web dominates all. The most effective spells at higher levels are simply amped-upped versions of these. In BG2, the level 2 Web spell remains dominant - but now you have mages who can stack down 10 each using sequencers - and it's common knowledge that there's too much other OP to bother listing.

Origins balances cooldowns by throwing more enemies at you in sustained encounters, which require constant adjustment and re-evaluation. On Nightmare difficulty (which all IE vets should play, right off the bat), Origins throws more enemies at you, buffs them in myriad ways, and increases their AI (lieutenants will favor their more powerful abilities, more often). In contrast BG has for the most part trivial trashmobs, of which one placement of Sleep or Web is enough to win. And when you scale difficulty up, you merely take more dmg and inflict less.

Lastly, the charges against Origins encounters not having something inbetween boss and trashmob aren't really true. There are many tougher encounters, in which a party's resources might be stretched. And while I can faceroll everything on Nightmare, that's only because I know the spells to take and when to use them. Which is why I can faceroll BG2 with even less effort with a solo sorcerer, just like everyone else.

Cooldowns or Vancian, it doesn't really matter providing there are restrictions that balance out the nature of both systems.